report writing

[Brad Manor]

Exactly my thoughts, Bob. I, personally, wouldn't be too happy not including some photos in a report, but if I had to choose between language and pictures - language wins hands down.

-Brad

[Richard Moore]

What you are saying is that all clients will understand properly written narrative and that is simply not true.

Now, where in the hell did I say that? [:-bigeyes That's a bit like me inferring that you don't think properly written narrative is that important because a few might not understand it!

My point was that while some photos can be, and often are, helpful they are not a substitute for the written word. If anyone feels that sticking a 100 photos in a report excuses them from fully describing the issues in clear language, then I have to disagree.

[Bain]

Originally posted by SonOfSwamp

Just to be contrary: Twenty years doing HI work and writing HI reports. Zero photos. A few Illustrated Home graphics.

No meaningful complaints, no confusion, no claims demanded or paid.

WJ

But it isn't merely about complaints, confusion and claims, Walter. It's about communication. And productivity. Anything can be reasonably well explained verbally and/or textually, but incredible amounts of time are saved when--like this afternoon--I can show someone a photo of yucko roof framing that even a layperson can understand is awful.

Rather than deliver a crash course on roof framing, I can merely point at the photo and say, "This is what's wrong, and these warped rafters are the result." One doesn't need a degree to understand that spaghetti-looking rafters are screwed up and need to be repaired. A photo communicates this problem much more quickly and succintly than words alone.

Slam cut to non sequitur. Chris's last post is dead on. That's why I'm retooling my reports to focus on the important stuff and spend less time on the minutiae.

We all make note of furnace and condenser sizes. I will never stop doing that. But does Joe Homeowner really care if he has a 75,000 BTU furnace with a three-ton condenser? Does he thoughtfully read and think about those numbers? Of course not.

Homnspector said, "The standards are there to be sure you looked at the size of the service entrance cables (not to pick on anybody). You look at it, you report it. If you don't report it, the client, the lawyer, the jury assumes you didn't look at it. Besides, I think it's lazy."

You don't have to mention and report on everything you see. If I look at it and it's okay, I don't have to worry about lawyers and juries. I'm not being contentious, and I'm not lazy. But all the CYA comments like, "The dishwasher was operated for a full cycle and functioned properly," are beginning to bore me. Suzy Homemaker doesn't give a rat's ass about what size her SE cables are unless there's something wrong with them or they pose a hazard. So why should a report for her house contain information about something that requires no action?

[Chris Bernhardt]

Now, where in the hell did I say that? That's a bit like me inferring that you don't think properly written narrative is that important because a few might not understand it!

Oops, sorry if I implied that, didn't mean that. I think Bain said it well. Were just talking about employing whatever means works.

Some people don't get it unless you show them a picture. Thats what I was trying to say.

Think about it, with googlization why does anyone have to learn anything the traditional way. When they need to know something they can google it! - coming scourge, Google mentality? I think my kids are coming down with that disease.

Chris, Oregon

[JohnC]

Sometimes a photo helps folks comprehend the message. I have told many people for example that the GFCI in the bathroom isn’t working properly and they get it. Sometimes I have clients’ who's eyes glaze over when I explain a bad GFCI so in those cases a photo with the written word convey the message.

John C

Download Attachment: Defective GFCI in 1st floor Bath.jpg

68.66 KB

[kurt]

Originally posted by Chris Bernhardt

I am sure that I am not the first one to say this but I can imagine a day where the current way of communicating the findings of the inspection will be web based in a garden of hyperlinks to useful information should the client wish to pursue it.

You betcha. It's the next step in my software development, although after this current round, it might be a while.

I see the trend that people care less and less about learning about a home and how it works. They just want to know whats wrong and who do they call to fix it.

Chris, Oregon

Also accurate. It took me a long while to learn how to work effectively w/photos. If you don't have a good procedure, the camera time & photo fiddling can eat up a good half day.

But, given the above observation (which I agree with completely) pic's are indispensable. Quick, fast, easy (w/the right software setup), and precise; no glossary necessary.

[hausdok]

Originally posted by Chris Bernhardt

Necessity is the mother of invention. I have historically had a lot of clients who can't attend the inspection and a lot more that are not proficient in english. Without a judicious use of pictures how do you propose to communicate the issues?

Even if my clients understood english and attended the inspection at least for the walk and talk they still often have to communicate the findings to others. It maybe a market thing. I imagine on higher end homes that they tend to negotiate price where as on the low end they tend to negotiate repairs.

Hi Chris,

Well, I'd venture to guess that my clientel are split 50/50 between Americans who read and write English and those who are from other countries - many of whom can't understand a lot of English. My own wife, bless her heart, has a very limited command of the English language, so I'm accustomed to explaining things to people who I know might not be able to comprehend everything that I'm telling them. Not that not being American means that Americans understand any better - a lot of the techie clients that I get have never even touched a hammer or screwdriver let alone tried to fix something, so it comes down to how you present to the client.

I've spent hours on the phone with out-of-town English and non-English-speaking clients, walking them through the reports and explaining things to them so that they'll have a good understanding of every issue in the report. I think that just comes with the territory.

I often don't have the luxury of doing a traditional walk & talk with my clients. Don't presume just because a client has hired you for an inspection that they want all that walky talky stuff because some don't or could really care less.

I don't. When they call me and want to know what kind of an inspection they're going to get, I tell 'em. I tell them that I prefer that they be at the inspection and that they should be prepared to do a walk-and-talk, so I can be sure that they'll fully understand every issue. I tell them to expect to be there not less than 3-1/2 hours and possibly as long as 5 hours. I tell them that if that's not what they're looking for they should contact another inspector. I tell them that they should also explain that all to their reeltor, because I won't speed things up to make it more convenient for the reeltor.

Most say that's why they called me - some say they can't find the time or that's not what they're looking for and I recommend they look elsewhere, because getting it right is every bit as important to my own financial well being as theirs and I won't be rushed.

What are you going to do, take a client up on a roof, in an attic, or through a crawlspace?

Of course I don't make them go up on the roof or into the attic or a crawlspace, but I've never stopped them from going when they wanted to go unless I thought it was too risky. I just tell them to make sure that the spouse or partner has a signed check in hand before they accompany me, 'cuz I have this rule about letting my customers get killed before I get paid. That makes most of them think twice about it and they change their minds. Some don't.

All joking aside, I've become a pretty good rapid sketch artist. I can come off of a roof, or out of an attic or crawlspace and rapidly sketch out what I find on a piece of paper,while explaining it to the client - in pidgen if I have to. I don't move on to the next item until I'm sure they understand the issue. When I'm sure that the client understands the issue fully, I move on.

What you are saying is that all clients will understand properly written narrative and that is simply not true.

Chris, Oregon

Nope, I'm not saying that and I never said it or implied it, and I'm not saying phooey to technology, because I'm too stubborn to change, as you implied in your next post.

You're missing part of the point that I'm trying to impress upon you, which is that the document portion of the report is as much for your own protection as it is for the client's benefit. It's essential that what you document is done in such a way that, not only the client, but you will be able to recall what you saw and did during an inspection - even if it's years from now.

A captioned photo without a detailed description of the issue won't be much good to you or anyone else years later, if you haven't bothered to carefully document what it depicts and the conditions under which you took it. As the inspector of record, you should to be able to go back to that record, pull it out, read it, and then be able to almost perfectly, if not perfectly, recall all the circumstances of the inspection.

You have an engineering background, correct? Aren't engineers taught to carefully support their findings with proper records in addition to sketches, graphs, and photographs? If an engineer makes a decision on a large expensive project and it comes into question years later, isn't he or she expected to be able to fully describe what the decision process was and defend his or her position? Don't you need carefully documented memos and records in the file to do that? Could you do that with a single photo, a few words of caption, and no report to put it in context? I can't, and I spent years training myself to focus so narrowly on the details of a case that I can easily recall very small details of many cases years later, but not so well that I have total recall.

We're dealing with homes that costs hundreds of thousands, even millions, of dollars. It's important to get it right the first time and to document it as carefully as possible. You never know when one of these jobs might come back to nip you in the assets. You can minimize your risk by doing the best inspection that you can do, the one that you'd expect from anyone inspecting a home for you, and ensuring your report is as near to bulletproof as possible.

11-1/2 years - $0 paid out to lawsuits and/or arbitrations and $0 spent on lawyers fees due to unhappy clients. $490. spent on a lawyer to deal with a builder who was pissed at me because he doesn't know how to follow simple written directions, and $1000 paid to an insurance company because I was foolish enough to call them for advice when a wacko client tried to scam me with a bogus claim in order to defer $7K of her $100K remodeling project. Oh yeah, and $175 back to a lady who had unrealistic expectations that the 15-year-old water heater I told her would probably go bad yesterday wouldn't.

$1685 in 11-1/2 years. I don't know, but I like to think my carefully written, though "long and boring" reports probably have something to do with keeping that number so low.

It works for me, anyway.

OT - OF!!!

M.

[Bain]

I'm just talking about giving a customer what he or she wants, and for most of them, like Chris and Kurt said, they only want the bad stuff. That and the stuff that allows them to use and enjoy their houses. I understand what you're saying, Mike, and I'm plenty careful about protecting myself. But in the past several months, two sellers have threatened lawsuits 'cause I killed deals on their houses. Another seller is supposedly on the cusp of suing me because a dishwasher leaked after I left her house. You know what? I get sick of it. So the bloody dishwasher leaked after I ran it through a cycle. Stuff happens. The chick wants to sue? Let her go for it. You say your long and boring(your words, my kind brother) prevent you from being sued, and I understand that. But with nothing but respect, I don't want to spend my days producing those long and boring reports for the sole purpose of not getting sued by some dipstick. I prefer to operate my business producing useful and valuable information for my paying customers. As for the dolts who may wind up trying to sue me? That's a part of business. But I won't dignify them nor invest them with the power to control how I operate my business on a daily basis. I don't want to operate my business in fear. I won't operate my business in fear.

John

[kurt]

Mike's right. One has to document what they did, and did not do. There has to be a clear (no pun) picture of what occurred the day of the inspection.

As someone who fought the idea of photos for a long time, I've figured out how to make it work for me.

As an example, how much describing what I looked @ is necessary if I have a bunch of pictures showing I was on the roof, in the attic, in the crawl, etc.?

Everyone's going to keep on doing what they've always done; HI's are stubborn. But, I lean toward the Chris mode now, more than I thought I ever would.

[chicago]

Image Insert:

157.03 KB

Image Insert:

384 KB

What is easy for us is not always easy for an office worker to understand and I feel the above is an example of how pics and illustration help people comprehend.

[hausdok]

John,

I don't "live in fear" and never have, and I don't spend my time writing reports the way I do "for the sole purpose of not getting sued by some dipstick." I do it because I think it's the right way to do things. I know that if I take my time, do the job right, and carefully document what I did, that I'll have very happy and satisfied clients and will never have to worry about them trying to sue me. To me, that's time well spent and is just as "productive" as anything else I do. Sure, there's going to be the odd "dipstick" that wants something for nothing, but I'm not losing sleep over them.

I'm not saying that you, Chris, or Kurt shouldn't be using pictures; only that it's important to produce a report that's as accurate as possible and which will help you in the future to describe everything about the day in question accurately, should the need ever arise. I just don't see how a report heavy on pictures but light on an accompanying explanation of events can convey that as accurately and forcefully as the written word. In fact, I don't think it can. If it could, there wouldn't be a market for books and we'd be talking to each other instead of sitting here writing our answers to each other.

I dunno, maybe it's my time in the military that has given me this mindset, but I don't sit here typing a report and then look at a sentence and ask myself, "Now, how can I word this not to get sued," I just write it as I'd say it if I were talking to my wife, brother, or mother, without giving the liability thing a thought. I do re-read my reports and rephrase them occasionally, though; when I think I've written something too weakly that won't accurately and honestly depict and describe the circumstances and the seriousness of an issue as forcefully as I want it to, while ensuring that, if I need to, I'll be able to recall that job almost perfectly years later.

As far as pissed-off sellers - I couldn't give a rats ass about sellers who are pissed at me and want to sue me. They come with the territory and are mostly just blowing off steam. The only one who's ever gone past threatening me by telephone was easily handled practically overnight with a letter from a SPL.

We can still automate and use the internet, but we have to realize that this is serious stuff that we do and doing serious stuff requires very careful and thorough documentation. Take pictures if you want to - just ensure that you include the detail necessary to ensure that you won't forget the circumstances of the job later on.

That's all that I'm saying. You can do it differently if you want to; that's your business, not mine - I'm just offering up my point of view. I don't expect everyone to agree with my point of view any more than you expect everyone to agree with yours.

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike

[chicago]

Mike ...I notice no comment from a man not at a loss for words.

[chicago]

WJ I put this as an example of how pics and illustration help for forum purposes.

I am the only one to do so for the obvious tear it down with a micro scope reasons.

Now if you wish lets all break it down and show how we would have done it correctly.

I seem to recall this thread started with the promise of show and tell.

Thank goodness I picked an easy subject.

[chicago]

So you would not report the vent or any defects and just leave a home owners guide?

I guess they could be trained to do their own inspection.

Since when is an inspection report an improvise?

[chicago]

You will have fun with this one to.

Image Insert:

201.72 KB

[chicago]

Ha Ha I understand what you are saying but I just threw that together and it is not from anything.

The general point I was trying to make is how pics and diagrams help the customer understand.

Now I am not picking ,but you make my point in that as inspectors we worry so much about being technical that we forget our audience and the whole reason for the report.

I bet at least half (just a guess) of the inspectors would do a more tech correct verbage, and at the same time most of the clients would prefer my version.

I think you get my point.

I also understand where you are coming from as an experienced inspector.

I knew the mis spell would get hit as the jest of the format got lost.

[Richard Moore]

[:-taped]

[hausdok]

Originally posted by chicago

Mike ...I notice no comment from a man not at a loss for words.

Well, Bob,

I was trying to be nice. Sometimes it's better not to say a thing. That's probably why Richard posted what he did.

Since you ask, I figured the garish color, tacky clipboard graphic, and confusing crowded page of text over that graphic would make my point for me. Unlike Walter, I didn't bother to proofread it.

What's wrong with saying something like:

Unsafe accordian-type duct connector: The clothes dryer is being vented with a flexible accordian-type plastic connector from the collar of the appliance to the wall outlet. The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has been reporting for years that, unless they're cleaned frequently, accordian-type ducts eventually become clogged with lint and will often catch fire. You can learn more about this on the internet at the CPSC website at this link: http://www.cpsc.gov/CPSCPUB/PUBS/5022.html

To correct this, CPSC recommends replacing the accordian-type connector with a smooth-walled metal connector. Replace the connector now and ensure that you clean the entire dryer duct system at least annually.

It's boilerplate so I don't have to retype it every time or insert and position a photo for it, it doesn't take up a whole page and, though a picture of the duct might help the to visualize it better, it's easily understood without a photograph.

OT - OF!!!

M.

[hausdok]

Originally posted by chicago

You will have fun with this one to.

Image Insert:

201.72 KB

Why couldn't you simply say?:

Soffit Damage: At __________, the soffit has been damaged near a downspout and needs to be repaired.

Why even bother to voice a theory about what's caused it? It's a pretty cut-and-dried issue, don't you think? There's damage; it should be repaired.

OT - OF!!!

M.

[Bain]

Hey, Mike. Gotcha, and 'nuff said.

Peace, as always.

John

[Neal Lewis]

That looks like the fascia to me, and probably just the aluminum trim coil.

[kurt]

Well, not trying to go all negative, but taking pic's of dryer ducts & taking up a whole page w/really bad narrative isn't what I'm talking about. The purple graphic, by itself, is offensive. (sorry....)

In my world, dryer ducts get a quick sentence delineating the hazard, and a hot link to the CPSC article. I might include a pic of the duct if the customer isn't present, but it would be along the lines of "this is the dryer duct I'm talking about".

The fascia/soffit dent is different. All of our reports go to an attorney; if I say "the soffit's damaged; fix it", I invariably get a call saying "how bad?". A quick & simple pic let's them make the call on how bad. If I try to qualify "how bad", invariably there's a contractor ready to go the other way.

This goes back to what I was saying about learning to work w/pic's effectively; it's real easy to go overboard, and have it all become superfluous. It's why I've developed software that allows me to run pictures any number of ways; I can use a few, a lot, or I can have a whole photolog of everything as visual record of where I was and what I looked @.

[SonOfSwamp]

Originally posted by kurt

It's why I've developed software that allows me to run pictures any number of ways; I can use a few, a lot, or I can have a whole photolog of everything as visual record of where I was and what I looked @.

So... you're being creative. What a concept.

Right brainers rock,

WJ

[chicago]

Thank you for the comments ,and I was not expecting any hold back on TIJ.

The reason you post here is that you are left brainers and not fans of images.

I intently made a graphically loud color comment to show the opposite of a long worded drawn out technical analysis.

There is a middle ground.

Please note that in the below case a picture does speak for you.

Image Insert:

48.66 KB

[Neal Lewis]

Is inoperational a real word?